IMPROVING QUALITY OF CHEESE

Putaruru Press, Volume VIII, Issue 342, 12 June 1930, Page 6

IMPROVING QUALITY OF CHEESE

SCIENTIST’S REPORT. Views of Morrinsville Managers. Suggested remedies for the problem of “ openness ” in cheese, which is stated to be costing the Dominion about £IOO,OOO annually, were contained in a lengthy report issued by Mr. P. O. Veale, research chemist to the Taranaki Federation of Cooperative Dairy Factories, and published recently in the press. Most of the report deals with the technicalities of cheese manufacture, on which only cheesemakers and dairy scientists are qualified to express an opinion.

Two cheese factory managers in the Morrinsville district whose opinions were sought stated emphatically that in their opinion Mr. Veale’s suggested remedies were impracticable of application. They said

it was significant that after a discussion the recent conference of factory managers and experts of the Dairy Division at Hamilton allowed the matter to drop. This seemed to indicate that Mr. Veale has few sup-

porters among the men with experience of cheesemaking, and without 1 their active support it will not be possible for his ideas to make headway. The suggestions put forward by Mr. Veale, if adopted, would revolutionise the manufacturing and marketing methods of New Zealand cheese producers. Mr. Veale deals with the causes of openness and expresses the opinion that while some of the trouble is inevitable, because of many distinctive features peculiar to the New Zealand cheese industry, most of it is preventable, and that New Zealand cheese factories could

alter their methods and produce a

much better article if directors of cheese companies deemed it expedient and payable to do so. • He thinks that financial inducements are more necessary than scientific research. Mr. Veale advocates grading of milk, encouragement of hand-milking and of low-test milk, and a gradual working towards the elimination of pasteurisation and standardisation. He advocates the encouragement of the manufacture of “ show cheese ” for export by what he describes as

“ the only feasible method,” namely, “ By a levy on the whole cheese industry to provide adequate premiums for finest cheese. Such premiums must be sufficient to compensate the factories for their reduced yield and higher wages and manufacturing costs, thus making it a good business proposition to aim at the very best quality.” Changes in the policy of the Dairy Division, the reform of the grading system, and the widening of the powers of division officers to enable them to coerce companies, if necessary, in the common interest, are also urged. He advocates curing cheese in the Dominion and exporting it in a mature condition, claiming that by so doing the Dominion would eliminate not only crack-openness but also the much-deprecated immaturity of New Zealand cheese. This, he contends, would also be the means of keeping off the market cheese which goes wrong after early grading. Mr. Veale claims that the expense involved in adopting the suggestions he makes would be small compared with the present heavy losses suffered by the cheese industry. Openness in cheese may be subdivided into three classes:— 1. Openness due to fermentation, and arising from the action of micro-

organisms. 2. Mechanical openness, the result of the simple failure of the pieces of curd to knit together. 3. The state or condition of export cheese which results in a quick drying out and the formation of large and unsightly cracks soon after a cheese is cut and exposed for sale. Commenting on the cause of fermentation openness, Mr. Veale urges the necessity for thoroughly sterilising cans which have contained whey which may have become infected. He says:— “ Owing to the practice of allowing the transport of whey to the farm in empty milk cans it follows that there may be a general infection of a factory milk supply with yeasts if cans have not been sterilised. Unfortunately many New Zealand factories causq trouble for themselves by serving out so-called ‘ boiling water ’ to suppliers for use at home for cleaning machines and cans. Where this pernicious practice exists sterilisation is impossible, and thus the infection of cheese-making milk is perpetuated.” Referring to the failure to develop lactic acid in the cheese vats, Mr. Veale states:— Nev\P Zealand cheesemakers nave discarded all attempts to ripen their milk, and add a starter and rennet immediately their vat is full of sweet milk. They are probably not to blame, as the position has been forced upon them, not only by the shortening of hours in the factory by labour unions, but also by the ever-increasing tendency of the suppliers to arrive at the factory late with their milk. Regulations which prescribe rejection of milk after a certain hour are difficult to enforce in these days of keen competition, and the present writer has been present in large factories where the last vat has been set after 11 a.m. Writing in favour of the use of low-test milk for cheesemaking, Mr.

Veale states that those who consider that an excessive fat test in the milk is one of the causes contributing to openness in cheese point to Southland, which handles a much lower testing milk than Taranaki or other North Island districts, and which has consistently scored of late in the overseas section of the London Dairy Show. Referring to the influence of modern New Zealand methods of manufacture, Mr. Veale says:— “ New Zealand cheesemakers possess the knowledge and the ability to make quite a close-bodied cheese,

as evidenced by the very superior '■ lines which they manufacture for show purposes. If the whole of our cheese were up to the standard of that exhibited at the New Zealand dairy shows there would be no complaints from our customers. Unfortunately the cheese industry is in the grip of a system which would penalise quite heavily any factory which attempted to break away from established procedure and export the equivalent of show cheese throughout the season. “ Generally speaking, it may be said that the daily routine of the New Zealand cheese factory is far too hurried, and our managers are , given no opportunity to exercise the

finer points of their workmanship. . . The manufacture of ‘ show cheese * all the year round would mean that the process would take from three to five hours longer every day in the factory. This would mean extra wages, increased fuel and power costs. Some better use might be made of the period from 7 a.m. to 10 a.m. when the staffs are frequently waiting for milk to arrive, but as long as farmers continue to arrive late so long will they add their quota to the difficulties and expense of making close cheese.”

The Report Criticised. “ Mr. Veale is only telling us what 90 per cent of cheese factory managers knew 30 years ago,” said one manager in the course of conversation with a representative of the, , Morrinsville Star. He added that the " conference of factory managers and officers of the Dairy Division at 4 Hamilton had not regarded the report with any enthusiasm, and had decided to let the matter drop. He gave it as his personal opinion that in advocating low test milk Mr. Veale was acting in co-operation with the Friesian breeders, who had a good organisation and were making vigorous efforts to popularise their breed. Mr. Veale based his contention on tests he had carried out with cheese made from two herds, but he should have experimented over at least three seasons. It had to be remembered, when making comparisons with Canada, that there were apparently no restrictions on the hours worked by factory staffs, and they worked up to 12 hours a > day, but such conditions would not" ” be tolerated in New Zealand. Another factory manager was equally sceptical as to the practicability of Mr. Veale’s suggested reforms. Commenting on Mr. Veale’s advocacy of low test milk, he stated that when making show cheese on one occasion he had produced cheese from Jersey milk that was graded 941, while another sample made from Friesian milk was graded 93. However, any experiments to test the re- 0 lative merits of low or high test milk would have to be carried out over a long period to avoid the formation of wrong conclusions.

As to the advantages of handmilking for the production of good cheese he considered machines were all right if they were looked after properly. Unfortunately some farmers omitted to cleanse their milking plant every day, and the bacteria which resulted infected the whole of the milk in the vats, causing the fermentation openness. It was probable that this would be overcome in the near future by the greater use of water heaters in milking sheds and the fuller realisation by all farmers of the importance of thoroughly cleansing their cans and machines. If machines were looked after properly, as they were on the majority of farms, there would not be so much risk of milk being infected with harmful bacteria as if the cows were milked by hand. In any case it was most improbable that farmers would ever revert to hand milking after becoming used to machines, for the use of machines had reduced costs, and to go back to hand power would require more labour on farms.

“ If you do away with pasteurisation you will do away with topdressing,” he continued, in referring to Mr. Veale’s suggestion that the pasteurisation process should be dispensed with as soon as possible since it was a remedy for a disease which should not exist. In recent years farmers had sought to increase production by top-dressing, with the result that the rank grass produced feed flavours which could only be eliminated by pasteurisation. In the early days of dairying when topdressing was not so popular tDere was less need to eliminate feed flavours. It was contended by Mr. Veale that pasteurisation, which killed the

good germs as well as the bad, was a factor in the immaturity of New Zealand cheese. Apparently the merchants at Home were taking far more notice of openness than they did a few years ago. Of course producers had to study the requirements of the Home buyers, and if they were opposed to open cheese we would have to try to make 1 a closer bodied cheese than we were ' doing at present. A great deal of the trouble could be avoided by dairy companies and inspectors making sure that milking plants were jpgpVto clean. Milk from dirty machines would taint a whole vat.